Red Mosquito

So the avocado was an omen? The first horseman of the pearl jamocalypse?

"And verily an avocado shall appear, and it shall be whole and not in the form of guacamole and it will bring the end, or at least a couple of meh albums and questionable decisions"

Lament wrote:T-shirts are cool. I have a few, and still wear one or two of them from time to time. But I'll always make fun of them for calling it a "Summer Line" and a "Winter Line." Like they're the Gap or something.

Well, every winter you have to get your Crashious Roadside Room hoodie and every spring you have to get your Mark Richards board shorts.

pearl jam sold out when they decided to cash in on the ashes of mother love bone

Pearl Jam sold out when they didn't write Betterman but put it on their third album anyway.

There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in anesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

I think the Stickman Welcome Mat was the official point of the moneygrab.

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in anesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

I am assuming that you meant to write aesthetic instead of anesthetic, but it's you, so I'm not sure.

also, I suspect you are right that 2006 on is a response to 2000-2004

stip wrote:

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in anesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

I am assuming that you meant to write aesthetic instead of anesthetic, but it's you, so I'm not sure.

That's what I get for dictating a post.

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in aesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

But what about us fans that are happy when they fulfill themselves artistically?

The wit and biting sarcasm of my original post aside , I think there is truth to the core message of it and it is much closer to your description concerning their reflection on the 2004 political efforts. There certainly was a shift towards making what they thought would be accepted more widely. While the s/t album was their "straight rock" / "return to form" incarnation, Backspacer was the unfortunate climax of that thought process.

And honestly, I don't think any less of them for it. We had 8-12 years of rewarding creation, I'm fine if that's all we really get, and the rest is filler and a set up for a good live show. They can do that until they're 80 as far as I'm concerned.

Kevin Davis wrote:I think this band sold out by partnering with Target. I also think they betrayed their fans by giving into Ticketmaster, and starting to make music videos again. It's like they used to be cool but then they got all old and stopped caring about all the things that made them cool.

stip wrote:pearl jam sold out when they decided to cash in on the ashes of mother love bone

harmless wrote:Pearl Jam sold out when they didn't write Betterman but put it on their third album anyway.

Pearl Jam sold out when they released all those live albums in 2000.

is this thread the equivalent bat signal for the given2trade account?

cutuphalfdead wrote:I just don't like how they don't make music as well as they used to.

Well, yeah.

Stop being so obvious. It's not as interesting.

Strat wrote:is this thread the equivalent bat signal for the given2trade account?

Sure it is.

Oh wait. What is that?

stupidmop wrote:So the avocado was an omen? The first horseman of the pearl jamocalypse?

"And verily an avocado shall appear, and it shall be whole and not in the form of guacamole and it will bring the end, or at least a couple of meh albums and questionable decisions"

So it was and so it shall be

hlniv wrote:

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in aesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

But what about us fans that are happy when they fulfill themselves artistically?

If they've done anything in the last 10 years, it's show that they have a keen sense of what makes their sound appealing to casual listeners and a very poor understanding of their own fanbase.

I think the scope of PJ20 and the awkward "GODDAMN I LOVE NO CODE" moment in the press kit interview piece both sort of illustrate how they might be buying into the storyline as it was being presented in 2000-2006 a bit too much...."Pearl Jam made two incredible records and then intentionally went weird and nobody liked that but their fans stuck with them anyway because there was the occasional gem and mostly the live stuff etc."

hlniv wrote:

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in aesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

But what about us fans that are happy when they fulfill themselves artistically?

The wit and biting sarcasm of my original post aside , I think there is truth to the core message of it and it is much closer to your description concerning their reflection on the 2004 political efforts. There certainly was a shift towards making what they thought would be accepted more widely. While the s/t album was their "straight rock" / "return to form" incarnation, Backspacer was the unfortunate climax of that thought process.

And honestly, I don't think any less of them for it. We had 8-12 years of rewarding creation, I'm fine if that's all we really get, and the rest is filler and a set up for a good live show. They can do that until they're 80 as far as I'm concerned.

as always, I'd challenge the assumption that they aren't feeling fulfilled artistically, insofar as this implies they don't like the music they've written. I do think they probably feel compelled to write a certain way, but that's not the same thing.

Remember, it's Ed who's been quoted numerous times that the "how will it play live" component is a major influence on the songwriting, and I'd imagine album song selection. Thats a really annoying perspective to me.

Thankfully, Jeff has taken more of the creative mantle recently. Hope he keeps that influence going forward - as most of the guys were really wowed by how My Father's Son turned out.

McParadigm wrote:

hlniv wrote:

McParadigm wrote:There is a very real change in commercial intention, and the resulting change in aesthetic, following riot act…but I think it's mostly a result of how thoroughly neutered they felt in their attempts to make a difference with all the 2004 politicizing stuff. And given how down in the dumps they looked for most of the 2000 US and subsequent tours, maybe they eventually came to respond to Roskilde by starting to make music that was less about fulfilling themselves artistically and more about what they thought would make fans happy.

But what about us fans that are happy when they fulfill themselves artistically?

If they've done anything in the last 10 years, it's show that they have a keen sense of what makes their sound appealing to casual listeners and a very poor understanding of their own fanbase.

I think the scope of PJ20 and the awkward "GODDAMN I LOVE NO CODE" moment in the press kit interview piece both sort of illustrate how they might be buying into the storyline as it was being presented in 2000-2006 a bit too much...."Pearl Jam made two incredible records and then intentionally went weird and nobody liked that but their fans stuck with them anyway because there was the occasional gem and mostly the live stuff etc."

Hopefully they realize the fallacy of this at some point. I think it's possible that they will, it has taken many deep fans years to come around to Binaural and Riot Act (myself included). I'm sure that the band thought Yield was their return to a "commercial" album, and they wanted to limit that type of approach, hence the shift into the unknown with Binaural with a new drummer, new producer, new recording technique, etc...

But for whatever reason, Binaural is pretty clearly their least favorite record as a whole, and I'm starting to think it has more to do with how they think their fans perceived it (which wasn't all that great initially) than their opinion of the finished product and the artistic quality contained therein. This would support the belief that they started a shift toward what the fans "wanted".

I'm just hoping they come around to see that many of their fans believe Binaural is one of the best things they've ever put out for exactly the reasons that they did what they did with it in the first place.

stip wrote: as always, I'd challenge the assumption that they aren't feeling fulfilled artistically, insofar as this implies they don't like the music they've written. I do think they probably feel compelled to write a certain way, but that's not the same thing.

Yes, you are correct. A prerequisite to achieving fulfillment is a belief and understanding of what is desired. If their desires have changed (which I think most here would agreed has happened), than they certainly could feel quite fulfilled through trying to please their fans as best they can.

It's just not what some of their fans were hoping for.